Quote Originally Posted by vpwphoto View Post
I am a pro-- I have earned 100% of my income via image making since 1989.
Anyway, I have used all manner of equipment, and my Hasselblad glass is still blemish free!
BUT my new 16-35mm Nikkor has gotten quite a coating blemish(s) from rough/carless use recently.
I usually scoff at people selling highly blemished Leica glass saying "does not effect images" as if this were the case why not send lenses out with blems from the factory.

I have prepared to send the lens to Nikon for repair/replacement of front element.
I shot an assignment (partly) with this lens this morning in a high flair situation... and at least in this instance I can not find evidence in image.

Shall I wait to send it till I do? They are ugly central blemishes. I would rate the lens as a 5 on a 1-10 scale right now. I had a 20mm with a blem that showed up in images 20 years ago. Not really looking for answers/advice... Just wondering what the nastiest lens blem some of you have trusted your income with?

I'm not a pro and have not worked professionally since the very early 1990s. I don't mind a fine cleaning wisp, if you use (as I do) lenses from 80 to 100+ years old you have to live with minor marks most of the time.

I have a 9 1/2" Dagor in a good early Compound which I picked up at a show. It has a 9mm scratch - almost a gouge - right in the center of the rear outer element - the worst possible location. I painted the blemish black, and the lens is just fine. I have another of the same vintage and focal length to compare it with and can find no effect. I don't think I did paying work with this lens, but I wouldn't hesitate to.

The front element of my 105 Nikkor has some light abrasions, which so far have caused no trouble - but I'm fairly fanatical about using proper lens hoods on all my lenses whether they are coated or not.